Gil*_*ili 29 java-8 jmh java-11
当我遇到一些令人惊讶的数字时,我正在使用jmh 1.21 比较JDK 8和11的性能:
Java version: 1.8.0_192, vendor: Oracle Corporation
Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units
MyBenchmark.emptyMethod avgt 25 0.362 ± 0.001 ns/op
Java version: 9.0.4, vendor: Oracle Corporation
Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units
MyBenchmark.emptyMethod avgt 25 0.362 ± 0.001 ns/op
Java version: 10.0.2, vendor: Oracle Corporation
Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units
MyBenchmark.emptyMethod avgt 25 0.723 ± 0.001 ns/op
Java version: 11.0.1, vendor: Oracle Corporation
Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units
MyBenchmark.emptyMethod avgt 25 0.724 ± 0.002 ns/op
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
OpenJDK 11和12执行类似于OracleJDK 11.为简洁起见,我省略了它们的数字.
我知道微基准测试并不表示现实应用程序的性能行为.不过,我很好奇这种差异来自哪里.有任何想法吗?
以下是整体基准:
pom.xml:
<project xmlns="http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xsi:schemaLocation="http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0 http://maven.apache.org/xsd/maven-4.0.0.xsd">
<modelVersion>4.0.0</modelVersion>
<groupId>jmh</groupId>
<artifactId>empty-method</artifactId>
<version>1.0-SNAPSHOT</version>
<packaging>jar</packaging>
<name>JMH benchmark sample: Java</name>
<dependencies>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.openjdk.jmh</groupId>
<artifactId>jmh-core</artifactId>
<version>${jmh.version}</version>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupId>org.openjdk.jmh</groupId>
<artifactId>jmh-generator-annprocess</artifactId>
<version>${jmh.version}</version>
<scope>provided</scope>
</dependency>
</dependencies>
<properties>
<project.build.sourceEncoding>UTF-8</project.build.sourceEncoding>
<jmh.version>1.21</jmh.version>
<javac.target>1.8</javac.target>
<uberjar.name>benchmarks</uberjar.name>
</properties>
<build>
<plugins>
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-enforcer-plugin</artifactId>
<version>1.4.1</version>
<executions>
<execution>
<id>enforce-versions</id>
<goals>
<goal>enforce</goal>
</goals>
<configuration>
<rules>
<requireMavenVersion>
<version>3.0</version>
</requireMavenVersion>
</rules>
</configuration>
</execution>
</executions>
</plugin>
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
<version>3.8.0</version>
<configuration>
<compilerVersion>${javac.target}</compilerVersion>
<source>${javac.target}</source>
<target>${javac.target}</target>
</configuration>
</plugin>
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-shade-plugin</artifactId>
<version>3.2.1</version>
<executions>
<execution>
<phase>package</phase>
<goals>
<goal>shade</goal>
</goals>
<configuration>
<finalName>${uberjar.name}</finalName>
<transformers>
<transformer implementation="org.apache.maven.plugins.shade.resource.ManifestResourceTransformer">
<mainClass>org.openjdk.jmh.Main</mainClass>
</transformer>
</transformers>
<filters>
<filter>
<!--
Shading signed JARs will fail without this.
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/999489/invalid-signature-file-when-attempting-to-run-a-jar
-->
<artifact>*:*</artifact>
<excludes>
<exclude>META-INF/*.SF</exclude>
<exclude>META-INF/*.DSA</exclude>
<exclude>META-INF/*.RSA</exclude>
</excludes>
</filter>
</filters>
</configuration>
</execution>
</executions>
</plugin>
</plugins>
<pluginManagement>
<plugins>
<plugin>
<artifactId>maven-clean-plugin</artifactId>
<version>2.6.1</version>
</plugin>
<plugin>
<artifactId>maven-deploy-plugin</artifactId>
<version>2.8.2</version>
</plugin>
<plugin>
<artifactId>maven-install-plugin</artifactId>
<version>2.5.2</version>
</plugin>
<plugin>
<artifactId>maven-jar-plugin</artifactId>
<version>3.1.0</version>
</plugin>
<plugin>
<artifactId>maven-javadoc-plugin</artifactId>
<version>3.0.0</version>
</plugin>
<plugin>
<artifactId>maven-resources-plugin</artifactId>
<version>3.1.0</version>
</plugin>
<plugin>
<artifactId>maven-site-plugin</artifactId>
<version>3.7.1</version>
</plugin>
<plugin>
<artifactId>maven-source-plugin</artifactId>
<version>3.0.1</version>
</plugin>
<plugin>
<artifactId>maven-surefire-plugin</artifactId>
<version>2.22.0</version>
</plugin>
</plugins>
</pluginManagement>
</build>
</project>
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
src/main/java/jmh/MyBenchmark.java:
package jmh;
import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.Benchmark;
import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.BenchmarkMode;
import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.Mode;
import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.OutputTimeUnit;
import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit;
@BenchmarkMode(Mode.AverageTime)
@OutputTimeUnit(TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS)
public class MyBenchmark
{
@Benchmark
public void emptyMethod()
{
}
}
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
这是我使用的Windows特定脚本.将其转换为其他平台应该是微不足道的:
set JAVA_HOME=C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.8.0_192
call mvn -V -Djavac.target=1.8 clean install
"%JAVA_HOME%\bin\java" -jar target\benchmarks.jar
set JAVA_HOME=C:\Program Files\Java\jdk-9.0.4
call mvn -V -Djavac.target=9 clean install
"%JAVA_HOME%\bin\java" -jar target\benchmarks.jar
set JAVA_HOME=C:\Program Files\Java\jdk-10.0.2
call mvn -V -Djavac.target=10 clean install
"%JAVA_HOME%\bin\java" -jar target\benchmarks.jar
set JAVA_HOME=C:\Program Files\Java\oracle-11.0.1
call mvn -V -Djavac.target=11 clean install
"%JAVA_HOME%\bin\java" -jar target\benchmarks.jar
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
我的运行时环境是:
Apache Maven 3.6.0 (97c98ec64a1fdfee7767ce5ffb20918da4f719f3; 2018-10-24T14:41:47-04:00)
Maven home: C:\Program Files\apache-maven-3.6.0\bin\..
Default locale: en_CA, platform encoding: Cp1252
OS name: "windows 10", version: "10.0", arch: "amd64", family: "windows"
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
更具体地说,我正在跑步Microsoft Windows [Version 10.0.17763.195]
.
Ale*_*lev 41
您正在测量空基准,而不是空方法.换句话说,测量处理基准测试的最小基础设施代码.这很容易剖析,因为您只希望热门路径上有一些指令.JMH -prof perfasm
或者-prof xperfasm
会在几秒钟内给你那些最热门的指示.
我认为效果是由线程局部握手(JEP 312)引起的,请参阅:
8u191:0.389±0.029 ns/op [到目前为止一直这么好]
3.60% ? ...a2: movzbl 0x94(%r8),%r10d
0.63% ? ...aa: add $0x1,%rbp
32.82% ? ...ae: test %eax,0x1765654c(%rip) ; global safepoint poll
58.14% ? ...b4: test %r10d,%r10d
? ...b7: je ...a2
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
11.0.2:0.585±0.014 ns/op [oops,regression]
0.31% ? ...70: movzbl 0x94(%r9),%r10d
0.19% ? ...78: mov 0x108(%r15),%r11 ; reading the thread-local poll addr
25.62% ? ...7f: add $0x1,%rbp
35.10% ? ...83: test %eax,(%r11) ; thread-local safepoint poll
34.91% ? ...86: test %r10d,%r10d
? ...89: je ...70
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
11.0.2,-XX:-ThreadLocalHandshakes:0.399±0.048 ns/op [返回8u perf]
5.64% ? ...62: movzbl 0x94(%r8),%r10d
0.91% ? ...6a: add $0x1,%rbp
34.36% ? ...6e: test %eax,0x179be88c(%rip) ; global safepoint poll
54.79% ? ...74: test %r10d,%r10d
? ...77: je ...62
Run Code Online (Sandbox Code Playgroud)
我认为这在很大程度上可见于像这样的紧凑循环中.
UPD:希望更多细节在这里.